Last post by Bart -
Thank you, Opagust. The boundary offset option is also very useful for songs with a refrain and several verses.
In the past I always moved the lyrics of the verses and of the refrain into separate staves with hidden rests (but with option to always show lyrics), and layering on a staff with music. With the collapse options, I could then to achieve the same result, but by playing with the boundary offset it is even easier.
Your solution for score that starts with a refrain and four verses goes as follows: Put the lyrics for the refrain in the lowest lyric line and reduce the boundary (which defaults to 26) to 12. In this case you cannot set the lyrics off for the refrain, since it is needed for at least one line, so the underscore trick is needed where for the lines where you don't want to pop up the refrain. If the refrain were at the end, no underscores would be needed.
First: Select the entire intro, press <Alt><Enter> to get the Notation Properties pop-up, go to the 'Notes' tab and select 'Never' under 'Lyric Syllable'. Then you can remove the extra spaces before the lyrics.
Second: At the start of the staff: 'Insert/Boundary Change...' and select 'Set new boundary offset' and lower the 'Lower' value.
Third: at the end of the intro: 'Insert/Boundary Change...', 'Reset Default'.
Finally: Go to 'Print Preview' to see the result and adjust until a good enough result.
Last post by Solong -
Possibly asked before but I can't find it! I have a 5 verse song with the verses under the staff - no problem, but I also have a long intro which ends up widely spaced since the Lyric configuration applies to everything. For years I've been putting numerous spaces before the start of the lyrics to get them in the right place but, of course, the staves in the intro remain very widely spaced. So: is there a better way of doing this? Is it possible to only apply the Lyrics and Lyric configuration to the piece of music they apply to and thus have the long intro print without huge spaces?
Last post by Richard Woodroffe -
I have to add that Gust's converter is also far more up to date than the Niversoft one. For goodness sake - Gust's one even accounts for the many plugins that have been written by users , not by NWC themselves.
A superb conversion program both into and out of NWC.
It seems that there may not be further updates of the NWC program (it doesn't seem like it does it - about 9 or 10 years since the last one I think)- such a pity- however, had there been more upgrades, one of the ones that I would have wanted would have been to include Gust's converter into the native NWC program.
Last post by David Palmquist -
Just getting back into notation - downloaded a PDF of marching band parts for Porter's Catalina Band, which was written around 120 years ago. When my band played it in the 1960s, I was fairly new to my instrument, and my part terrified me. I recently found the PDF online, and my current bandmistress has agreed to try it for our summer outdoor concerts.
The original version has outdated instrumentation such as Db piccolo, Eb Horns, etc. but I found a somewhat updated version in Musescore. He didn't do all the parts, but it's a breeze to download the MusicXML version, translate to NWCText with Niversoft, and work in NWC2. Beauty.
The only problem is the articulations didn't carry through, so it will take a couple of hours to change them all. No worries.
My reason to write is to thank Mike for his Acciaccatura object. Works like a dream and it's going to save my eyesight, bigtime. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
Last post by Richard Woodroffe -
Folks The Scriptorium has been updated with works submitted by :
Maurizio Spagni Gitana - caprice pour la harpe, op. 21 (Hasselmans) Maurizio Spagni Guitare - pièce charactéristique, op. 45 (Hasselmans) Richard Woodroffe Nur wer die Sehnsucht kennt "Sehnsucht" D310 (Schubert)
If you would like to be notified every time the Scriptorium is updated, please send an e-mail requesting Scriptorium Update notification to nwcscriptorium "at" gmail "dot" com
Last post by Flurmy -
Yes, Lawrie, as far as I know you're correct. Just a detail: the original pascal was a semi-compiled language. The compiler used to generate the so-called "P-code", later interpreted during runtime. Then arrived Borland Turbo Pascal... Look here.
Last post by Lawrie Pardy -
Love the Ada Lovelace example.
Please correct me if I'm wrong (likely) but the way I now understand it is that a program ends up being compiled, whereas a script has come to mean any language that requires an interpreter to be running, and halfway between that are the semi-compiled languages though the compiling step would make me consider them programming languages rather than scripting languages.
Thus: C, Pascal etc. are programming languages - they need to be compiled before they will do anything. VBScript, Javascript, php etc. are scripting languages - they use an interpreter to parse a text file in real time. Then there's the semi-compiled languages that are compiled into an intermediate format (e.g. Bytecode) but still require a runtime component to interpret the semi-compiled "program". I believe .NET, java and python are current examples of this approach.
Last post by Flurmy -
Quite often, the terms script and scripting are used as synonyms for program and programming, respectively. The inventor of the Perl programming language, Larry Wall, tried to explain the difference between script and program in a humorous way.
Quote
Suppose you went back to Ada Lovelace and asked her the difference between a script and a program. She’d probably look at you funny, then say something like: «Well, a script is what you give the actors, but a program is what you give the audience». That Ada was one sharp lady… Since her time, we seem to have gotten a bit more confused about what we mean when we say scripting. It confuses even me, and I’m supposed to be one of the experts.
